The strange web of Baltimore City Hall ethics
The city’s law office issued an opinion this week supporting a notion offered by Mayor Sheila Dixon’s defense attorneys. They say she was under no requirement to disclose gifts from developers doing business with the city because in part because the Ethics Commission didn’t keep a properly certified list of those companies.
The law department letter said that a database the Ethic Commission has used to determine business doing with the city does not conform with rules, and therefore does not count as a list.
Curious to us is the author of that letter.
It came from the desk of Donald R. Huskey, the deputy city solicitor. As our colleague Annie Linskey notes, he also is the law department’s appointee to the five member Ethics Commission.
So a high-level official in a department controlled by Dixon is now opining that another panel on which he serves has not been following the rules for years. Huskey must have had quite a time putting that argument together.
Others on the ethics board include the chair Dana P. Moore a senior attorney at Venable LLC and Alexander Chambers, a City College teacher and the necessary Republican member. There are two vacancies.
Feel free to comment on this, of course.
Comments
It looks like a twenty year cycle of repeated behaviors by folks in Baltimore City.
Here we have the people in charge of ensuring that the ethics codes is administered, failing to appoint qualified people (or, maybe she couldn't find two more Baltimore residents qualified to serve on the ethics board - no - that can't be it) and failing to have the commission fulfill its basic responsibilities and make a list. The State Ethics Commission has a list.
The elected official takes what would be prohibited things from persons who would be on the list of people who are prohibited from giving gifts, without declarations, or something.
When caught with the gifts, the defense says, there is no list, therefore no one is a prohibited giver.
When a state delegate from Baltimore used his position to obtain things by spending tax dollars and spending contributions, he was cleared because he signed the documents proving the bad behavior when he wasn't authorized to sign the documents. Without the proper signature, the documents were not valid evidence. he was re-elected!
Baltimore City elected representatives and public ethics can be added to the list of common oxymorons. If not, then at a minimum add them to the list of mythical animals.
Posted by: Bruce Robinson | January 16, 2009 3:21 PM
Sehr wertvolle Informationen! Empfehlen!
Posted by: gesundheit | March 12, 2009 6:30 PM